ot: so how do a merchant ship and destroyer have a collision?

[eddief]

pilot error or what?

[ultraman6970]

Well, I always wonder the same thing, in the middle of nowhere two giant boats crash. Wonder if there was any people looking???

[merckxman]

I've been wondering the same thing. Plenty of radar, electronics.

[eddief]

but you'd think modern ships would have radar collision avoidance systems. or maybe in a great big ocean "mostly" no need.

[Tickdoc]

Two ships in the night?

[bicycletricycle]

I am not a sailor or an expert in any way in the ways of the sea.

however.

Seems like some kind of gross negligence.

[merlinmurph]

I read that the destroyer was stationary, so the freighter hit it.

Coincidentally, a Nantucket high-speed ferry went up on a jetty in Hyannis harbor last night. Talk about embarassing. No word yet if the captain's name is Hazelwood.

[numbskull]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40314128

This link shows a very erratic course taken by the freighter. Looks like they may have made an initial course deviation that took them towards an island, reversed course to find the channel, then veered to get back on their originally intended course.

I suspect that if the US ship was stopped, the decision to do so while broadside to an erratically approaching craft was a poor one and will likely cost the commander his career.

[CaptStash]

Originally Posted by numbskull

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40314128

This link shows a very erratic course taken by the freighter. Looks like they may have made an initial course deviation that took them towards an island, reversed course to find the channel, then veered to get back on their originally intended course.

I suspect that if the US ship was stopped, the decision to do so while broadside to an erratically approaching craft was a poor one and will likely cost the commander his career.

Thanks for posting that. It's one weird track. It will be interesting to learn what the heck was going on. In most collisions, both ships are at fault. I still doubt (hope?) that the destroyer wasn't stopped. That would be just plain nuts. All merchant ships are also required to carry a Voyage Data Recorder (VDR) like an airplane's black box. It will have voice, ECDIS, GPS and radar data. With any luck that will be retrieved and reveal a lot.

CaptStash....

[smontanaro]

Originally Posted by numbskull

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40314128

This link shows a very erratic course taken by the freighter.

For those of us not used to looking at maritime maps, what's the approximate scale of that last map which shows the detail of the erratic course of the container ship? Google Maps suggests it's perhaps 20-25 miles from Minamiizu to Toshima.

[numbskull]

I would expect there is a defined shipping lane between the two land masses (and I am assuming that there are laws against large commercial ships operating outside of defined shipping lanes in order to protect the costal water small boat traffic). It looks like something happened where the freighter turned sharply off track (the initial abrupt brief deviation of track to the right), then followed an incorrect course, likely taking it out of the shipping lane. When it realized the error (and its associated dangers and liabilities) it reversed course to get back to where it should have been then turned again to follow its originally planned course. It seems likely that this latter maneuver was when the collision occurred but I'm just speculating.

[Tony]

Bodies found inside the ship.

[CaptStash]

Originally Posted by numbskull

I would expect there is a defined shipping lane between the two land masses (and I am assuming that there are laws against large commercial ships operating outside of defined shipping lanes in order to protect the costal water small boat traffic). It looks like something happened where the freighter turned sharply off track (the initial abrupt brief deviation of track to the right), then followed an incorrect course, likely taking it out of the shipping lane. When it realized the error (and its associated dangers and liabilities) it reversed course to get back to where it should have been then turned again to follow its originally planned course. It seems likely that this latter maneuver was when the collision occurred but I'm just speculating.

Assumptions are dangerous. I suspect that what you are calling a shipping lane is a TSS (Traffic Separation Scheme). Since it would be offshore, it would have to be IMO approved (it's a UN thing) and that takes some time. From what I have read do far, Japan is apparently working towards that, but at present there is no TSS in the area. There is no rule that says a vessel has to operate in a TSS, but there are a set of very specific rules as to how vessels are to operate within a TSS, and when crossing, entering or leaving one.

One theory I have read from other mariners suggested that the Crystal made the 180 degree turn in order to avoid congested traffic. I have never had to do that, but I know lots of people who have. Usually a round turn does the trick to let things clear out before you proceed. I am also under the impression that the Crystal was operating on a timed arrival which is fairly standard for a liner (she was only making 14.5 kts) so they may also have been burning time. Slowing down might not have been an option if they were operating just above the barred speed range of their engine. Slow speed diesels typically have an speed range that can not be used due to excessive vibrations. 14.5 kts sounds about like full ahead maneuvering, and the next step down (below the barred range), half ahead, may have been too slow. Lots of conjecture and guessing though.

Note: I was just looking at the AIS track again and it seems the Crystal's spped was up and down a bit. I'll look for an active version of teh track to see if I can get a better idea of what waqs going on.

CaptStash....

[rallizes]

the plot thickens

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...T.nav=top-news

"The container ship continued east for another half hour before reversing around 2:00 a.m. and returning to the scene. The Japanese Coast Guard and U.S. Navy initially said the collision happened at 2:20 a.m. because the ACX Crystal did not report it until 2:25 a.m."

that would account for the weird path of the container ship...

[alancw3]

update is that the japanese coast guard is now investigating why the accident was not reported for almost an hour:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/uss-fitz...ed-hour-japan/